By Barney Brenner
Hillary Clinton’s corruption has been well known for years. Many have been convicted for vastly lesser crimes. During the presidential campaign, the political Right was hopeful that she would be indicted for exposing national security secrets. But in the aftermath of the election, with the presidency of Donald Trump, there may now be a better approach.
In the closing days of his administration, Obama granted clemency to, among hundreds of others, an unrepentant 1970s-era terrorist/bomber and a 21st-century gender-dysphoric traitor who leaked hundreds of thousands of sensitive and classified military and diplomatic documents which almost certainly resulted in the deaths of some foreign allied personnel and possibly some of our own.
But Hillary was not on Obama’s list despite the precedent set with Gerald Ford’s pardoning of Richard Nixon (technically prosecutorial immunity since Nixon had not been charged with a crime). The most likely reason, since the innocent don’t need forgiveness, is that an offer and acceptance of immunity could be construed as an admission of guilt. And if there’s anything the Clintons are good at, it’s denying guilt.
While her earlier criminal violations are extensive – Clinton financial improprieties go back to their days in Arkansas including her impossible cattle futures profit as well as the Whitewater real estate scam – the current infractions are dramatically more serious and well within the time frame for prosecution.
In other times and places, her late activity would be handled as treasonous. Transfer of classified material to unauthorized personnel, even inadvertently, is what General David Petraeus paid dearly for. Obstruction of justice for deleting classified emails that were under investigation is another whopper. The FBI has good reason to believe that Russia and China are in possession of every one of her documents – to the detriment of our military and national security. And despite her denials, those papers were clearly sensitive and secret.
Then there’s the pay-for-play charade otherwise known as the Clinton Foundation. Hillary sold the Lincoln Bedroom during her time as First Lady and there’s not much question that the White House would have been available to the highest bidder or virtually anyone else with deep enough pockets. Conflicts of interest were legion during her time at State. Cash was on the come with the probability of her taking the White House.
While Jeff Sessions has stated that as AG he would recuse himself from any investigation, that doesn’t mean that those currently being conducted in New York, California, Florida and Arkansas would necessarily be curtailed.
Sessions is a political appointee, but the Civil Service career prosecutors at Justice and elsewhere are good at their jobs and are most often eager to do it. No action need be taken to allow the investigations to continue. With Donald Trump now in the White House, there’s been no indication that those activities will be interrupted. On the contrary, Trump has shown little inclination for disappointing his supporters.
But granting immunity after investigations are over would be quite workable – and worthwhile. The evidence would be in, indictments handed down, and then as the Left is gearing up for war, the air would be knocked out of their sails. Prosecutors would have the satisfaction of presenting their case without having to defend it in protracted litigation and there would be no risk of an acquittal, which would be touted as an exoneration. The whole affair could easily be a net plus for Trump – and the country.
Would there be some turmoil on the Right? Probably. But most would likely consider it justifiable. Trump would come off as magnanimous and it could also weaken the Left’s prospects going into the 2018 midterms. The Left should be drained of energy and funding whenever possible and this would leave them deflated.
Any whining after the good cop/bad cop ‘rescue’ of their heroine would appear hollow. Without putting the country through a mini Civil War over her potential prison time, which would energize the Left, Hillary would be permanently compromised and her political prospects considerably diminished.
For HRC supporters, the action would be bittersweet. But it would be schadenfreude for the Right.
The value of prosecuting a woman of questionable health in her 70th year is dubious. It might be more politically expedient to kill her with kindness. In any case, the country has bigger concerns on its plate.